- Beautifully illustrated with many rare and unpublished images
- Was the choice of the U.S. Cavalry simply horses or tanks?
- Was Patton a careerist officer or shrewder than perceived?
- Implications for modern and future military equipment and doctrine
Following the First World War, horse cavalry entered a period during which it fought for its very existence against mechanised vehicles. On the Western Front, the stalemate of trench warfare became the defining image of the war throughout the world. While horse cavalry remained idle in France, the invention of the tank and its potential for success led many non-cavalry officers to accept the notion that the era of horse cavalry had passed.
During the interwar period, a struggle raged within the U.S. Cavalry regarding its future role, equipment, and organisation. Some cavalry officers argued that mechanised vehicles supplanted horses as the primary means of combat mobility within the cavalry, while others believed that the horse continued to occupy that role.
The response of prominent cavalry officers to this struggle influenced the form and function of the U.S. Cavalry during the Second World War.
||248 x 172 mm
||25 April 2019
||150 black-and-white photographs
Alexander Bielakowski is a former U.S. Army Reserve officer who has authored or co-authored three monographs as well as edited a two-volume reference work. He spent more than a decade educating military officers at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Currently, he is Editor-in-Chief of the peer-reviewed journal U.S. Military History Review and a professor at the University of Houston-Downtown.